Saturday, September 15, 2012

This way and that way....

Americans v Brits.

Any discussion of Richard III needs this photo:

Photobucket

Speaking of evil villains:  Karl Rove.

WWII as seen today.  (a long gif.)

Romney v truth.

It's MAN talkin' time!  ... about rape.

Electronic voting machines ... have 'sleepovers' at poll-workers' houses.

Public education isn't being helped by all the testing... but the testing companies sure are making money!  And if you aren't in it for the money... you obviously are a loser.

Not an oxymoron:  a gay Christian, Matthew Vines.

Alzheimer's could be the most catastrophic impact of junk food
There is evidence that poor diet is one cause of Alzheimer's. If ever there was a case for the precautionary principle, this is it
And of course, cats

. madwhitekitty

10 comments:

Steve Bates said...

Alzheimer's due to poor diet? Sorry... no. I simply do not believe that is true. My sainted mother prepared healthful meals for herself and my father to within perhaps 2 or 3 years of the end of her life, and neither of them went out for fast food often enough to have made any difference. Their diets were close to identical: Mom got Alzheimer's; Dad did not.

OTOH, I am somewhat amenable to (and afraid of) the notion that Alzheimer's is related to Type 2 diabetes. Mom's mother was diabetic (as am I); she did not suffer dementia, but her (non-diabetic) daughter did.

And now to fight the CAPTCHA battle...

Steve Bates said...

BTW, "Discount Tent" had me ROTFL. Been there, in my younger days.

ellroon said...

I've camped enough to know I'm not fond of it. Still have all the gear, but I've put it all away in my disaster/ earthquake spot.

I think we are beginning to isolate all the commonalities and weigh them. We'll probably find each one dominoes onto the other to create receptivity to the disease.

And I read Tey's novel about the innocence of Richard III and saw the excellent Olivier's performance of Shakespeare' play... and have always wondered what was the truth. Maybe we will now find out...

Steve Bates said...

Having done computer work for a genetics department (UT Center for Demographic and Population Genetics), and of course having done a lot of reading, I find the thing that grows clearer year by year is that genetics is just not as simple as Mendel's results would imply.

A couple of good sources I've read recently: Richard Dawkins's 30th anniversary edition of The Selfish Gene (which contains incredible amounts of general genetics knowledge quite apart from his thesis as expressed in the title) and, on an ongoing basis, The Mermaid's Tale, a blog written by two of the geneticists I used to work for/with (Ken Weiss, Anne Buchanan) and one of their more recent colleagues at Penn State (Holly Dunsworth). All very much worth your time!

(Once more into the CAPTCHA fray...)

ellroon said...

Thanks. Have you referenced them before? The titles are familiar. Just trudged through Climbing Mt. Improbable by Dawkins. Exposing myself to new vocabulary, not a biologist. Will look for the two you cite though.

And yeah, I tend to simplify things a bit too much...

Steve Bates said...

Re: gay Christians...

If even closeted gays are ever banned from mainstream Christian churches, there's going to be a massive shortage of organists and choir directors. How do I know this? During the first years of the AIDS epidemic, Houston suffered such a shortage, to the point where even large wealthy churches could not be assured of finding these persons on the church job market.

As for my former UU church, the organist and choir director were both straight. It was the minister who was gay. And out and proud!

(Speaking of the deity, Dog damn CAPTCHA...)

ellroon said...

Count on the new generation to understand and welcome the full spectrum of gender/sexual types. The LGBT/Transgender groups are gaining recognition and sympathy in the youth even while there are those who try and deny there is anything but man/woman roles.

And I like your UU church more and more.

Steve Bates said...

A few years ago, a physically female, gender-ambiguous blogger took me under her (his/her?) metaphorical wing and explained a bunch of things to me; otherwise I probably would not know those things. But another, younger generation knows them, and (apart from the god-botherers) they seem to have a more expansive attitude toward sexuality as a whole. More power to them!

Sometimes I worry about the laws that, e.g., the Texas Lege and Goodhair could pass if they went on a rampage against sexual variety...

stasisonline said...

A same-sex attracted Christian is not an oxymoron, but a Christian who actually has sex with someone of the same gender is an oxymoron. Ditto for a Christian who has sex with someone they are not married to.
http://www.christianpost.com/news/theologians-find-vines-homosexuality-is-not-a-sin-thesis-not-persuasive-82341/pageall.html

ellroon said...

You are using Christian as if there is a consensus between all branches of Christianity. I know of many Christian people who worship God, go to church, who are gay or with unmarried partners and are not sinners in the sight of the congregation nor disobedient of their church's precepts.

All you are doing is separating the act from the desire which is no help to anyone.